Moore v. Boing Boing [1]

In December 2009, counsel for Demi Moore sent a demand letter [2] to Boing Boing [3], in regard to a November 17 Xeni Jardin post titled "Was Demi Moore Ralph-Laurenized on 'W' mag cover, with missing hip-flesh? [4]."  The post consisted almost entirely of commentary from Anthony Citrano, a Los Angeles-based fashion photographer.  Citrano speculated that Moore's hip looked digitally manipulated in a cover photo for W Magazine and offered some commentary on the "clumsy mistakes" and "bad art" involved in photoshop botches.

Days later, Jardin published another post titled [5]"Demi claims missing hipflesh is for real. But $5000 says its Moore photoshopping" [5] that icluded the full text of Moore's denial on Twitter, and an offer from Mr. Citrano to make a $5,000 donation to a charity of Ms. Moore's choosing if the image she'd published were provably the unretouched original.

Moore's December 15 letter asserted that the posts defamed Ms. Moore by suggesting that she "secretly uses extraordinary artificial means to alter her appearance," and by insinuating that Ms. Moore had been untruthful in informing people that the image accurately reflected her body and hip. The letter also enclosed supporting letters from W's Creative Director Dennis Freedman and from Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott, the photographers who took the photo. Freedman's letter stated that "no one at the magazine did any retouching of the image of Demi Moore," and the photographers' letter said "there was ABSOLUTELY no retouching on her lips or waist or legs!!"

Moore's letter demanded an apology and retraction, and that Boing Boing remove all false and defamatory statements about Ms. Moore or the photo from the website.  The letter also warned: "Confidential Legal Notice, Publication or Dissemination Is Prohibited." 

In response, counsel for Boing Boing sent a response letter [6] disputing the validity of Moore's claims. The letter denied that Boing Boing made any provably false statements and that the posts said anything defamatory or disparaging about Moore—"[t]o the contrary, any criticism of the photographs by Mr. Citrano is directed entirely at those who may have altered the photographs."  The letter also argued that Boing Boing acted without actual malice, relying "reasonably and thoughtfully upon the opinion of Mr. Citrano—a professional photagrapher with expertise in fashion photography (including manipulation and retouching techniques)." 

In December, Jardin published another post [7] explaining Boing Boing's position and attaching both letters. The post concluded: 

At no point was it the intent of this blog, or this blogger, to insult or offend Ms. Moore, who has embraced the openness of internet culture by way of frequent and intimate Twitter updates. Discussions about whether and/or how a widely circulated image may have been altered are common here on Boing Boing. We are a blog about digital culture, after all, and the technical and creative details that go into producing the images we consume are an essential part of our culture. 

Moore's counsel sent a nearly identical letter to Jezebel.com [8] and fashion photography blogger Anthony Citrano [9].